Rethinking urban transformation: Temporary uses for vacant land |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Planning and Design, College of Architecture and Planning, University of Colorado Denver, CB 126, PO Box 173364, Denver, CO 80217-3364, USA;2. Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Architecture and Planning, University of Colorado Denver, CB 126, PO Box 173364, Denver, CO 80217-3364, USA;1. Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Department of Geography, Lab for Landscape Ecology, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany;2. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, Permoser Straße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany;3. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Department of Urban and Environmental Sociology, Permoser Straße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany;1. Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional & Community Planning, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA;2. Department of City and Metropolitan Planning, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA;3. USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Evanston, IL 60201, USA;4. Department of Recreation, Sport and Tourism, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, USA;2. Department of Landscape Architecture, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 120 F Burruss Hall (0190), Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA;3. USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 5 Moon Library, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY 13215, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | As some cities grapple with economic decline and depopulating neighborhoods, a number of academics and professionals have focused their attention on the causes, conditions and patterns of the resultant vacant land, whereas others lay out broad programmatic, institutional, fiscal and design responses to address vacancy on site or citywide scales. We find that, regardless of condition and context, most responses advocate complex, officially sanctioned, formal programs and policies that call for or depend on implementation over several multi-year phases. While laudable in scope, we question whether “permanent” solutions are appropriate given the widely varying causes, durations, contexts and patterns of vacancy and the inability of similarly scoped government-led programs to thus far achieve intended goals or improve local quality of life. We present examples that make the case for temporary, incremental, flexible and experimental responses to urban vacant land, then conclude by outlining the potential benefits and drawbacks of this temporary use model. |
| |
| Keywords: | Vacant land Public space Temporary use Tactical urbanism Shrinking cities |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
